What happened to getting married before having children?

seven-day-weekend

Almo wrote: »

You're both posters who I actually respect very much, Thanks! having seen very sensible posts on multiple occasions from both of you (I read far more than I post). The reason I'm taking issue with these posts is this idea that 'many' women or 'many' men are acting in this way. Certainly some are, I don't dispute that. By the same token, many women get married purely to 'save' the relationship. Many women get married so they can access their husband's wealth. Many women marry the wrong person because they fear being alone far more than being in an unhappy marriage. Many women have children just so they won't be alone later in life (a friend voiced this very belief the other day. I nearly choked. This friend fervently believes in marriage, by the way).

The second part of your post, seven-day-weekend, just brings us full circle. I've already explained how I've committed to my partner. As an atheist, I believe it is entirely wrong for non believers to get married in church. I have exactly the same legal ties to my OH as a married couple (in this country) so I genuinely don't understand how I am any less committed.

You have to look at each relationship individually - I still think marriage is a great thing for those who want it. There are imperfect cohabiting relationships and imperfect marriages. It's about the people, not the label.

So do I. We were atheists when we married (although we are both believing Christians now)and got married in a registry office.

AFAIK you don't have the same legal ties as a married couple (Unless you are a same-sex couple in a civil partnership). Co-habiting couples have no legal tie to each other.

I agree that each case must be taken on it's merits (I know several co-habiting couples who are happy together, my son and his girlfriend for a start); however I still believe that marriage, in general, shows more commitment.

Almo

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

So do I. We were atheists when we married (although we are both believing Christians now)and got married in a registry office.

AFAIK you don't have the same legal ties as a married couple (Unless you are a same-sex couple in a civil partnership). Co-habiting couples have no legal tie to each other.

I agree that each case must be taken on it's merits (I know several co-habiting couples who are happy together, my son and his girlfriend for a start); however I still believe that marriage, in general, shows more commitment.

In the country in which I live, we do (ETA: after 2 years).

seven-day-weekend

Almo wrote: »

In the country in which I live, we do (ETA: after 2 years).

Sorry, I hadn't realised you lived abroad.

zcrat41

I'm 29 and lots of my friends are beginning to get married. I fervently believe in the institution of marriage. For a few reasons, some religious (I'm Christian,) some practical (inheritance issues) but mainly because I believe it provides a stable family upbringing.

I'm from a very rural area where its still quite a scandal to get divorced.

Oldernotwiser

Almo wrote: »

In the country in which I live, we do (ETA: after 2 years).

But you don't in the UK, however long you live together and however many children you have together.

(Thanks for the compliment by the way.)

red_devil

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

So do I. We were atheists when we married (although we are both believing Christians now)and got married in a registry office.

AFAIK you don't have the same legal ties as a married couple (Unless you are a same-sex couple in a civil partnership). Co-habiting couples have no legal tie to each other.

I agree that each case must be taken on it's merits (I know several co-habiting couples who are happy together, my son and his girlfriend for a start); however I still believe that marriage, in general, shows more commitment.

it does not stop splitting up though.

seven-day-weekend

red_devil wrote: »

it does not stop splitting up though.

No of course it doesn't.

But it does make people try harder, assuming they meant the promises they made when they got married.

Oldernotwiser

red_devil wrote: »

it does not stop splitting up though.

Of course it doesn't stop people splitting up but it does offer a woman and her children more protection if they do.

I hate to see so many women deliberately making themselves so vulnerable in this situation and not opting for the limited protection that marriage can offer. I can't help feeling that they would feel rather differently if they didn't know that the welfare state would be there to pick up the pieces if a relationship collapsed.

Allegra

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

No of course it doesn't.

But it does make people try harder, assuming they meant the promises they made when they got married.

But promises can be made without a religious ceremony - and a registry office ceremony does not feature any promises (unless you count the bit about no legal impediment as a promise).

There is no ceremony, religious or otherwise, that would make me more commited to my partner than I already am. On the other hand, the marriage to my ex now means so little (due to his complete disregard of his responsibilities as a husband and father) that I can not even bear to part with the money necessary to legaly dissolve the marriage.

I did it all in what appears to be considered the right order first time round - got married before having kids and all that. It did not add to the quality of the relationship, it did not add to the quality of family life, in fact, all it did for me was cheapen the concept of marriage irrevocably. I could not bear to have my other half lumped into the same category as the ex, that of a "husband" - and I could not bear to be my other half's "second wife" - a moniker that would forever imply an afterthought, an also-ran. We are so much more to each other than that.

Having said all that though.... As I get older, it gets all that much harder to swim against the current. It's probably only a matter of time before I give in to the societal expectations and tidy up all the loose ends - but that's all it will ever be, a declutter and a tidy up. Commitment and promises have already happened, long ago.

Allegra

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Of course it doesn't stop people splitting up but it does offer a woman and her children more protection if they do.

I hate to see so many women deliberately making themselves so vulnerable in this situation and not opting for the limited protection that marriage can offer. I can't help feeling that they would feel rather differently if they didn't know that the welfare state would be there to pick up the pieces if a relationship collapsed.

Does it ? I got none when my marriage disintegrated, and neither did my daughter. Nor did we get anything from the welfare state.